Information about Bard IVC Filter Lawsuits from Lawyers Handling IVC Filter Lawsuits

No-Cost, No-Obligation Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit Review

IVC Filter Lawsuits

A California Jury Finds The Bard IVC Filter Is Negligently Designed

Bard IVC Filter Lawsuits

Leaving a retrievable IVC filter in too long can cause life-threatening blood clots and device migration

Friday, August 27, 2021 - Plaintiffs are suing Bard Peripheral Vascular and C.R. Bard, Inc., for bringing to market a faulty medical device that had no place ever being invented. More than 8000 cases are pending in federal district courts across the US from individuals that have experienced Bard IVD filter complications. The spider-like device was doomed from the start because it would have eventually harmed every patient in which it was implanted given the faulty logic of its design. On the one hand, the Bard IVC (interior vena cava) filter is designed to irritate within the artery and elicit an immune system response of healing and creating scar tissue that encapsulates and holds the device in place. On the other hand, that scar tissue is what prevents its necessary removal after the device has achieved its desired purpose of trapping blood clots after about 60-90 days after being inserted. Make no mistakes; the Bard IVC filter is a temporary device that is intended to be removed and can not be left inside the body for a prolonged period. When a surgeon tries to remove the IVC filter they have to tug and pull on it, exerting more force than is safe and can damage the artery. Other times, using force to remove the device can cause it to break into multiple pieces, some removed, some left embedded in the artery, and some pieces free to migrate and embolise to the heart or lungs, potentially causing life-threatening damage to other organs also.

A Santa Barbara jury confirmed that opinion when it decided in favor of a plaintiff recently who alleged that the design of the Bard IVC filter was negligent. According to PR Newswire (PRN), "A jury awarded $926,000 to a plaintiff in an IVC filter case after unanimously finding that Bard had negligently designed the filter." When the removal of the IVC filter goes wrong, emergency revision surgery is required with all of the risks that major surgery and anesthesia entails. In the IVC filter lawsuit above, "Justin Peterson, represented by Martin Baughman PLLC, Dallas, Texas, was injured when a Bard Eclipse IVC filter perforated his vena cava and duodenum leading to massive bleeding and the necessity of an open abdominal surgery to retrieve the filter and repair the damaged blood vessel and small intestine," PRN wrote. The first bellwether IVC filter trial resulted in a multi-million dollar jury award to a woman that almost died from the procedure. "Plaintiff Sherr-Una Booker was implanted in June 2007 with a Bard G2 IVC filter to mitigate her risk of pulmonary embolism during or after a surgery, according to court documents," MassDevice.com, wrote.

Leaving a retrievable IVC filter in too long remains the item of contention for those who have been injured by the device. If you or a loved one have had an IVC filter implanted and has been unsuccessful in removing the device, you may be at risk of the device producing blood clots or tilting and lacerating the inferior vena cava.

More Recent IVC Filter Lawsuit News:

No-Cost, No-Obligation Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit Case Review for Persons or Families of Persons Who Suffered from Organ Damage, Severe Bleeding, Stroke, or Death

OnderLaw, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The Onder Law Firm has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others, and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.